Jaime Aroldo Regalado Montepeque v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAIME AROLDO REGALADO
MONTEPEQUE,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-73281
Agency No. A072-526-691
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 18, 2015**
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Jaime Aroldo Regalado Montepeque, a native and citizen of Guatemala,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his motion to
reopen removal proceedings conducted in absentia. Our jurisdiction is governed
FILED
NOV 25 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to
reopen. Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 674 (9th Cir. 2011). We deny in part
and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen as
untimely where Regalado Montepeque does not dispute proper notice of the
hearing, filed his motion to reopen more than 14 years after his final order of
removal, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(C), and failed to establish that he acted with
the due diligence required for equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see Avagyan,
646 F.3d at 679.
We lack jurisdiction to review Regalado Montepeque’s contention regarding
the expiration of his order of removal because he did not exhaust this claim before
the BIA. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1); Sola v. Holder, 720 F.3d 1134, 1135 (9th Cir.
2013) (per curiam).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
13-73281 2

-- 2 of 2 --